ticular destination points or areas are interpreted as authorizing service from points in the District of Columbia and the 48 States constituting the United States prior to the admission of Alaska to the specified destination points or areas; those authorizing service 'between points in the United States' are interpreted as authorizing service between points in the District of Columbia and the 48 States constituting the United States prior to the admission of Alaska; and those authorizing service at points described in text which depends for its meaning upon the definition of 'States' or 'United States' are interpreted as authorizing service at only those points which were within the meaning of the text at the time of issuance thereof" (sec. 204, 403, 49 Stat. 546, as amended 56 Stat. 285; 49 U.S.C. 304, 1003. Interpret or apply sec. 207(a), 208(a), 209, 211, and 410(c), 49 Stat. 551, 552, as amended, 554, as amended, 56 Stat. 291, as amended; 49 U.S.C. 308, 309, 311, 1010). It is further ordered, That this order shall be effective on November 30, 1959; And it is further ordered, that notice of this order shall be given to the general public by depositing a copy thereof in the office of the Secretary of the Commission at Washington, D.C., and by filing with the Director, Office of the Federal Register. By the Commission. [SEAL] HAROLD D. McCoy, Secretary. It is to be noted that this order will become effective on November 30, 1959. It would seem, therefore, that after that date, the forwarders involved in operations between Alaska and in the other States, if they continue such operations, may be in violation of the Interstate Commerce Act. Of course, final action upon the grandfather legislation cannot be accomplished before next year. Similarly, motor carriers which had hoped to come under the proposed rule, will be affected by this new rule. That concludes my statement on that particular bill. I would like, however, to make some further statements in regard to the ratemaking bills. Senator BARTLETT. Glad to hear you, sir. Mr. MELIUS. Bills H.R. 564 and H.R. 8565, and identical bills S. 2451 and S. 2452: Each of these four bills sets up a joint board to be composed of the members of the ICC, the FMB, and the CAB. The lower-numbered bills provide for one Commissioner from each agency. The higher-numbered bills provide for such number of Commissioners and examiners as the Chairman of the respective agencies may select, from time to time. H.R. 8565 and S. 2451 provide for mandatory joint rates and through routes between and among carriers subject to parts I, II, and III of the Interstate Commerce Act, and carriers subject to the shipping acts, and the Federal Aviation Act of 1958. Forwarders would be excluded from these bills, by reason of the fact that part IV is not included; at this time, I do not take a position for or against this mandatory bill, but if favorable action is taken, we as freight forwarders would be-would prefer to be included, since all other modes of transportation would be required to enter into joint rates, and we might find ourselves in a noncompetitive position. H.R. 8565 and S. 2452 provide for permissive joint rates, and through routes, between the continental United States and Alaska and Hawaii, between and among all common carriers subject to the Interstate Commerce Act, the Shipping Acts, and the Federal Aviation Act. Each mode of carriage would file its joint rates with its own regulatory agents; that is, the railroads with the Interstate Commerce Commission, nondomestic water carriers with the Federal Maritime Board, motor carriers with the Interstate Commerce Commission, and freight forwarders with the Interstate Commerce Commission. These permissive joint rate bills include surface forwarders, and we, therefore, favor their passage. To the extent that forwarders could work out joint rates with the underlying carriers and established divisions of the forwarders through rate, it would be desirable. To the extent that such through joint rates could not be worked out, there is, of course, nothing to prevent continued forwarder operations on the basis of contracts with motor carriers and payment of published rates of the rail and water carriers. We think, however, that we should have the freedom to work out through joint rates and be on an equal basis with our competition. If we cannot be competitive, we can no longer adequately serve the public. That concludes my statement. Senator BARTLETT. Thank you, sir. Mr. BARTON. Just one or two questions. Mr. Melius, at present, the Interstate Commerce Act forbids the making of joint rates between forwarders and other carriers, does it not? Mr. MELIUS. I don't know whether it forbids it, but we don't have them; it doesn't provide for the joint rates. Mr. BARTON. At any rate, you would like to have it in the case of transportation to Alaska. Is that the burden of your statement there? Mr. MELIUS. That is correct. Mr. BARTON. Thank you, sir. That is all that I have. Senator BARTLETT. Thank you, Mr. Melius. The committee desires to thank the citizens of Anchorage for the very useful, helpful testimony they have given on these several bills; and we have been gratified to have had such a large attendance on the part of those who have not cared to testify, who have been here as auditors; and I am sure that I speak for Mr. Moulder, and would speak for all the other members of both committees, in saying that the testimony given here, and in the other Alaskan communities, and I am sure that which will be given as we continue on our trip, will be a major factor in the final determinations to be made regarding this legislation. The committee leaves tonight for Seward. Hearings will be held there in the morning, and in Cordova in the afternoon. From Cordova, we go on to Valdez, and then to Fairbanks. The committee now will stand in recess to reconvene at Seward in the morning, at an hour uncertain, so far as the chairman is concerned. (Whereupon, at 5 p.m., Monday, October 26, 1959, the hearing in the above-entitled matter was recessed to reconvene Tuesday, October 27, 1959, in Seward, Alaska.) ALASKAN AND HAWAIIAN TRANSPORTATION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1959 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE, Seward, Alaska. The committee met in Seward, Alaska, Hon. E. L. Bartlett presiding. Senator BARTLETT. The committee will come to order. We are happy to be in Seward in the course of hearings which have taken us to date from Ketchikan up the coast and from here we shall go on to Cordova and Valdez and later to Fairbanks where the series of hearings will probably be concluded. I first want to express appreciation to the people of Seward for moving the hearing hour from 10 o'clock to 9 o'clock in recognition of the schedule which was necessarily changed. I should like at this time to inform the residents of Seward that beginning yesterday this became a joint hearing. Up until then it was a hearing only of the Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Yesterday we had the pleasure of being joined in Anchorage by Representative Morgan Moulder of Missouri, a member of the corresponding House committee, and he sat with us yesterday. Congressman Moulder had hoped and expected to be on this leg of the journey but he came down with a very bad cold and he asked me to express regrets at his inability to come to Seward. I should like for the benefit of the local people to introduce the members of the party who are with me and who are giving so much assistance as we study these transportation and allied matters. Both the staff members and the others in the party. I shall start from the right of the table here and introduce to you Mr. Allen Perley, who is acting counsel for the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee. Actually, he isn't any such thing. Actually, he is legislative counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives, and he and his staff draft all or practically all of the bills which are introduced in the House, and his is a very busy job-a difficult job, as indicated by the fact that several thousand bills are so introduced every year. At any moment I expect Mr. Perley to draft a new bill eliminating the number of bills which may be introduced. On Mr. Perley's left is Mr. Harry Huse, of the Senate committee who handles matters having to do with fish and wildlife. He has been in Seward before. He was here in 1938, but I understand that another member of the party, Frank Barton, in an early-morning walk, had to show him the sights around here. Frank hadn't been in town before. And at my immediate right is the chief counsel for the Senate committee, and a very able and efficient chief counsel he is, Harold Baynton. To my left is the transportation counsel for the committee, Frank Barton, who guided Mr. Huse this morning. Taking this all down is a man who first came to Alaska when he was 3 years old. He has lived at St. Michael and at Anchorage and has been all over the premises. He now lives in Seattle, Bill Miller. Seated over here is none other than our esteemed and well-liked State commissioner of the department of commerce, Abe Romick. The committee has the great pleasure of having with us on this Alaska trip, and his presence indicates the importance of the bills being considered, Laurence Walrath, a member of the Interstate Commerce Commission of the United States of America, Mr. Walrath. And on Commissioner Walrath's left is Henry Whitehouse, attorney for the ICC. And the gentleman by him is an Alaskan who heads the ICC office for Alaska in Anchorage, Bill Meehan. We have had the pleasure of having had with us ever since Juneau a man who I thought at the moment was in Nome, but turned up in Seward. Alaska-born Henry W. Clark, vice president of Alaska Steamship Co. at Washington, D.C. Fred Lordan, of Seattle, an attorney who has worked with the committee, especially in reference to bills having to do with trucking. And there is still another man along, I'm glad to report, and I think this indicates also the importance of the legislation when the American Association of Railroads sends to Alaska one of its topflight men from Washington, William Thompson. Now there are before us a number of bills pertaining mainly to transportation in which the people of Alaska have an interest. Notices were issued several weeks ago that hearings were to be held and the people of Seward were invited and urged to express themselves on these bills. I should like to give a brief description at this time of the various measures before us for consideration, but before doing so I want to repeat something that Representative Moulder said yesterday in Anchorage, because it is ever so true. He said it is most unusual for committees of the Congress to go into the field and to hold hearings in a particular locality, even one hearing on bills, because obviously if this were to be done universally Congress would never get any business done and everyone would be out of Washington all the time, and therefore I am especially happy that Chairman Magnuson of the Senate committee was good enough to approve this trip which will take us to so many Alaska communities, and happy also that Chairman Orin Harris of the House committee agreed that the hearings should be of a joint nature. Now there is before us S. 1507. This is intended to make the Interstate Commerce Act applicable to transportation by waters between Alaska ports and other ports in the United States. You will recall that at one stage of the consideration of the Alaska statehood bill the ICC was placed in control of this water transportation. Subsequently, that situation was altered and the Federal Maritime Board was left with jurisdictional authority. This bill would apply the Interstate Commerce Act to the Alaska situation. I think it is a fair statement to say on account of testimony that was offered rather vol |